Male abortion rights?

By: Marianne Bossert

Posted: 3/27/06

On March 9, men's rights activists filed a lawsuit aimed at giving men the right to opt out of financial responsibility for raising a child. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a man who is required to pay child support for his ex-girlfriend's daughter.

The activists are hoping to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court and their goal is to establish a procedure that allows men to opt out of monetary child support for a limited amount of time at the beginning of an unplanned pregnancy, just as women can opt out of raising a child by choosing adoption or abortion.

Although many women's rights activists may disagree with giving men this option, the men may be making a reasonable request provided the courts establish other laws to ensure the process runs smoothly.

The main argument women's rights activists may make against the release of financial responsibility is a woman's freedom to have an abortion has nothing to do with her right to choose or not to choose parenthood; it has to do, rather, with her right to choose what she can do with her body. This is a legitimate argument and is hopefully the reason many women's rights activists fight anti-abortion legislation.

This argument, however, misses a critical point in the debate: the decision to abort or give up a child for adoption does give the woman the opportunity to relinquish responsibility for the child.

Even though the woman's right to choose abortion was not established with the intention of absolving the mother from parental responsibilities, the mother is nonetheless granted that benefit as a side effect of the law. It is an extreme double standard to grant this choice to the woman and not to the man.

That being said, the court needs to establish some procedural standards in order for the process of opting out to be successful.

First, the father must be required to make his decision before the child is born and with enough time left in the pregnancy to give the woman time to consider her choices.

A reasonable frame of time would be relatively small; the man would have to make his decision soon after he discovered the pregnancy in order to make sure the woman is comfortable with having an abortion if the man refuses to pay for the child. Many women would be very uncomfortable with a last-minute decision to give a child up for adoption and many more may be uncomfortable with an abortion after the first trimester of pregnancy.

No woman can be expected to make a decision about the future of her pregnancy without significant time and knowledge of her partner's financial and parental role in the child's life. A reasonable time frame for the man to decide would be within two months of the discovery.

Second, the father must waive not only financial responsibility, but also full parental rights.

Just as a woman gives up full rights as a parent when she chooses to abort or give up her child for adoption, the man must give up all rights to the child when he opts out of his responsibilities as a parent. The woman, assuming she decides to have the child, must be left with full custody of the child and the father must never be able to bring a custody battle to court.

The mother also must have complete control over the child's access to and knowledge of his father because she has become the sole parent. This is perhaps the most crucial stipulation that must be placed on the process because no mother can claim parental rights without financial responsibility. If men truly want to establish equality, they cannot expect anything different.

Although this idea makes sense on the surface it has problems that need to be worked out before it can be put into practice. A man must be willing to make the same responsible decisions a woman must make when she decides to terminate her pregnancy or give up parental rights. Otherwise, the man is not only claiming superiority over the woman but also causing problems for an innocent child.